The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire was written between 1776 and 1789 in several volumes by Edward Gibbon (1737-1794). It is very educational and controversial about the role of religion in the Roman downfall — still in our own century in which the American Empire is ruling over most of the planet. Considering that 85 per cent of US citizens believe in god, one should worry, but the theory is complex and contradictory. Gibbon studied this well.

According to Gibbon, the Roman Empire succumbed to barbarian invasions in large part due to the gradual loss of civic virtue among its citizens. They had become weak, outsourcing their duty to defend their empire to barbarian mercenaries, who then became so numerous and ingrained that they were able to take over the Empire. Romans, Gibbon believed, were unwilling to live a tougher, military lifestyle. 

In addition, Gibbon argued that Christianity created a belief that a better life existed after death, which fostered an indifference to the present among Roman citizens, thus sapping their desire to sacrifice for a larger purpose. He also believed that Christianity's comparative pacifism tended to hamper the traditional Roman martial spirit. Finally, like other Enlightenment thinkers and British citizens of the age steeped in institutional anti-Catholicism, Gibbon held in contempt the Middle Ages as a priest-ridden, superstitious Dark Age. It was not until his own era, the "Age of Reason," with its emphasis on rational thought, it was believed, that human history could resume its progress.

Here one must be circumspect, as the charlatans of religions always manage to sell their wares in whatever system of temporal comforts becomes available to us.

Gibbon saw the Praetorian Guard as the primary catalyst of the empire's initial decay and eventual collapse, a seed planted by Augustus when the empire was established. His writings cite repeated examples of the Praetorian Guard abusing their power with calamitous results, including numerous instances of imperial assassination and incessant demands for increased pay.

read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_of_the_Decline_and_Fall_of_the_Roman_Empire

Gibbons says it himself: 

[A]s long as mankind shall continue to bestow more liberal applause on their destroyers than on their benefactors, the thirst of military glory will ever be the vice of the most exalted characters.

The influence of the clergy, in an age of superstition, might be usefully employed to assert the rights of mankind; but so intimate is the connection between the throne and the altar, that the banner of the church has very seldom been seen on the side of the people (Chapter Three p. 52).

History...is, indeed, little more than the register of the crimes, follies, and misfortune of mankind (ibid. p. 69).

If we contrast the rapid progress of this mischievous discovery [of gunpowder] with the slow and laborious advances of reason, science, and the arts of peace, a philosopher, according to his temper, will laugh or weep at the folly of mankind.

So Can we interpret that Gibbons was an atheist, or at least a strong critic of the church?.. Obviously, the Church was strongly opposed to Gibbon's book. As his book became very successful, Gibbon was elected to the zealot Tory Dr Johnson's Literary Club... Dr Samuel Johnson's pissory lap dog, James Boswel was not impressed with Gibbon he described as:

An ugly, affected, disgusting fellow... poisons the literary club to me ... I class him amongst infidel wasps and venomous insects...

Ohlala... Zing...

Gibbon:

As Christianity advances, disasters befall the [Roman] empire—arts, science, literature, decay—barbarism and all its revolting concomitants are made to seem the consequences of its decisive triumph—and the unwary reader is conducted, with matchless dexterity, to the desired conclusion—the abominable Manicheism of Candide, and, in fact, of all the productions of Voltaire's historic school—viz., "that instead of being a merciful, ameliorating, and benignant visitation, the religion of Christians would rather seem to be a scourge sent on man by the author of all evil."[15]

As the happiness of a future life is the great object of religion, we may hear without surprise or scandal that the introduction, or at least the abuse of Christianity, had some influence on the decline and fall of the Roman empire. The clergy successfully preached the doctrines of patience and pusillanimity; the active virtues of society were discouraged; and the last remains of military spirit were buried in the cloister: a large portion of public and private wealth was consecrated to the specious demands of charity and devotion; and the soldiers' pay was lavished on the useless multitudes of both sexes who could only plead the merits of abstinence and chastity. Faith, zeal, curiosity, and more earthly passions of malice and ambition, kindled the flame of theological discord; the church, and even the state, were distracted by religious factions, whose conflicts were sometimes bloody and always implacable; the attention of the emperors was diverted from camps to synods; the Roman world was oppressed by a new species of tyranny; and the persecuted sects became the secret enemies of their country. Yet party-spirit, however pernicious or absurd, is a principle of union as well as of dissension. The bishops, from eighteen hundred pulpits, inculcated the duty of passive obedience to a lawful and orthodox sovereign; their frequent assemblies and perpetual correspondence maintained the communion of distant churches; and the benevolent temper of the Gospel was strengthened, though confirmed, by the spiritual alliance of the Catholics. The sacred indolence of the monks was devoutly embraced by a servile and effeminate age; but if superstition had not afforded a decent retreat, the same vices would have tempted the unworthy Romans to desert, from baser motives, the standard of the republic. Religious precepts are easily obeyed which indulge and sanctify the natural inclinations of their votaries; but the pure and genuine influence of Christianity may be traced in its beneficial, though imperfect, effects on the barbarian proselytes of the North. If the decline of the Roman empire was hastened by the conversion of Constantine, his victorious religion broke the violence of the fall, and mollified the ferocious temper of the conquerors (chap. 39).[16]

Not all of Gibbon's work was perfect, but was so incisive few can dispute its worth. They only dispute the minutiae of some of Gibbon's arguments. The Russian historian George Ostrogorsky writes, "Gibbon and Lebeau were genuine historians — and Gibbon a very great one — and their works, in spite of factual inadequacy, rank high for their presentation of their material.

So, here we are in the 21st century, still fighting the religious bullshit — the bullshit that destroyed the Roman empire in part and completely created the dark ages with intent — all carefully invented to cultivate ignorance.

Spurred by the development of sciences in the 16th century, the sceptics of religion in the 18th century became aware of the need for change. The period ended up with the American war of independence, the French revolution, the industrial revolution and the scientific age. But we still have to fight the religious bullshit to this day. It seems the religious dogma has become somewhat desperate in protecting some idiotic beliefs proponents attack sciences relentlessly more and more with worse and worse bullshit. 

And of course, the conservative press, now owned by Mr Murdoch is pushing hard to sell us this semi-creationist porkies. We are presented with some "opinions" in the opinions pages, that would not have made it a few decent years ago, because opinions, then, still needed to be backed up by a minimum amount of decent facts and some research, not fantasies. These days everything goes: fantasies, fairy tales, ignorance, rubbish. This bullshit is grown like a GM crop of spaghettis in a field of complete ignorance and watered by illogical scienticide. 

Comes Melanie Phillips at The Times (a Murdoch publication). Melanie is a old ultra right wing conservative columnist:

Science is turning back to the dark ages

Ocean acidification is sometimes called “climate change’s equally evil twin,” and for good reason: it's a significant and harmful consequence of excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that we don't see or feel because its effects are happening underwater. At least one-quarter of the carbon dioxide (CO2) released by burning coal, oil and gas doesn't stay in the air, but instead dissolves into the ocean. Since the beginning of the industrial era, the ocean has absorbed some 525 billion tons of CO2 from the atmosphere, presently around 22 million tons per day.

At first, scientists thought that this might be a good thing because it leaves less carbon dioxide in the air to warm the planet. But in the past decade, they’ve realized that this slowed warming has come at the cost of changing the ocean’s chemistry. When carbon dioxide dissolves in seawater, the water becomes more acidic and the ocean’s pH (a measure of how acidic or basic the ocean is) drops. Even though the ocean is immense, enough carbon dioxide can have a major impact. In the past 200 years alone, ocean water has become 30 percent more acidic—faster than any known change in ocean chemistry in the last 50 million years.

Scientists formerly didn’t worry about this process because they always assumed that rivers carried enough dissolved chemicals from rocks to the ocean to keep the ocean’s pH stable. (Scientists call this stabilizing effect “buffering.”) But so much carbon dioxide is dissolving into the ocean so quickly that this natural buffering hasn’t been able to keep up, resulting in relatively rapidly dropping pH in surface waters. As those surface layers gradually mix into deep water, the entire ocean is affected.

Such a relatively quick change in ocean chemistry doesn’t give marine life, which evolved over millions of years in an ocean with a generally stable pH, much time to adapt. In fact, the shells of some animals are already dissolving in the more acidic seawater, and that’s just one way that acidification may affect ocean life. Overall, it's expected to have dramatic and mostly negative impacts on ocean ecosystems—although some species (especially those that live in estuaries) are finding ways to adapt to the changing conditions.

http://ocean.si.edu/ocean-acidification

-------------------

THIS is real life, not the fantasy brought up to you by the creationists or misinformation gods of the Tories. Because guess what? I believe that Melanie Phillips is a fundamentalist Christian despatched to fight the sciences as well as other pagan rites such as tattoos and cupcakes for LGBTs.

The heading of her article itself is misleading and pissing on reality: "Science is turning back to the dark ages". You can see some attempt at trying to turn the table of religion having created the dark ages... The dark ages as Gibbon mentioned were due entirely to "priests" and religion being stifling — or trying hard to asphyxiate real investigation of reality. 

So, where were we? The social construct of the empire and its many facets of deceit is used to distract us from reality, including the worth about other human beings. Melanie is a cog of the Empire. She has an opinion about everything and that's fair but where sciences are correct, she needs to place a baby-dummy in her trap. She knows zip. 

Melanie Phillips is a right-wing British journalist, author and public commentator. She started on the left of the political spectrum, writing for The Guardian and New Statesman. During the 1990s she moved to the right, and currently writes for The Times, Jerusalem Post and Jewish Chronicle, covering political and social issues from a social conservative perspective. Phillips defines herself as a liberal who has "been mugged by reality."

The reality is that Melanie has also been published by the GWPF, the dishonest Global Warming Policy Forum, which is Lord Lawson's baby of disinformation, effluenting from the UK. Melanie Phillips' propaganda is also lauded by another religious network called Breakpoint seemingly dedicated to denigrate sciences. 

Gibbon was correct in his assessment of the role of religion in the demise of the Roman Empire... We have been on the same road with the Brits, and now the Yanks. Meanwhile the surface of earth is warming up. Sciences are correct.

Gus leonisky

Local historian sitting on the Aurelian wall...